Pending Law of Dignity with Death
In June 2016, a new law that legalizes physician assisted suicide will take effect in California. In California, the law will allow terminally ill patients to end their lives legally through prescription medication. The state law has been passed as few dying Californians started to move to other states such as Oregon, which had already legalized the law. In California, patients who are dying had been in limbo, after the California lawmakers approved the law last year in the State Senate. The supporters of the law have appreciated the bill claim that it gives them an option and will finally help critically ill people to end their life. The opponents of the law claim that the number of cases of premature suicides would increase with the passing of the law (CBS, 2016).
Physician Assisted Suicide
Introduction
With the acceptance of a medical advancement an ethical dilemma is created. New life saving drugs and participant forces question over endorse physician assisted existences to emerge. One of the biggest questions concerning daily life is the level to which doctors need to go for saving a patient’s life. The question over the integrity of the patient’s life has been present for years. The rising question over physical assistance is that there has been a turning point in the acceptance of physician assisted suicide. Many doctors have started to side with the acceptance of the law, as they start realizing the relevance behind the regulations (Newman, 1992). Therefore, it has become easier to relate to the law and accept that physician assisted suicide has to be accepted as norm.
Stance
Death with dignity provides a choice to terminally ill patients, whose quality of life is close to nothing. The use of aid in dying is supported in cases where suffering crosses the bearable limit. Some states such as Oregon, Montana, New Mexico, etc. have already accepted and legalized Physician assisted suicide and many terminally ill patients flock over to these states to end their life. It is important to understand that physician assisted suicide ends the suffering of a patient and helps in retaining dignity when life slowly leaves a body. The right to self-determination provides the dying patient with one last chance to control their destiny and can be seen as a form of empowerment (Barone, 2014).
Medical care is expensive in the United States of America and physician assisted suicide reduces the cost of medical care of an individual who would anyways die. It is also important to understand that physician assisted suicide helps family members of the patient to handle grief is a better way. With the family members and friends informed, handling grief from the issue can be easily accepted. Simply put, physician assisted suicide is nothing more than mercy killing as terminally patients are saved from immense pain and facing the indignity of prolonging illness that has only one end. In addition, many people have already found ways by entering states that accept physician assisted suicide (Barone, 2014).
Freedom is one of the main advantages, as the terminally ill patient is able to choose his/her own destiny. It is a way to help the patient control their own life, at times when several other liberties of life are already lost on them. Patients get to relieve themselves and their family members of costs and pain that would be faced with the prolonged fight with illness. The fight deteriorates the physical condition of the terminally ill patient and further increases pain from the added medication and physician assistance to prolong life. Physician assisted suicide works as patient empowerment as the patient decides if he/she wishes to longer (Barone, 2014).
The physician assisted suicide does not restrict the patient to the hospital bed, as many patients choose the path of hospice and palliative care. It ensures that with time the terminally ill patient will perish, but at the same time it also ensures that acute patient care provided in hospitals in avoided. The choice of end-of-life care makes physician assisted suicide a more logical choice as many prefer to end their life while spending time around their loved ones. The autonomy and reduction in the length of the dying process are a means to enhance quality of life and protect whatever dignity is left for a dying individual (Barone, 2014).
If physically well people get the choice of making life decisions, it seems only fair that people who are dying get the opportunity to explore their own destiny. Such respect for autonomy ensures that the choice if death becomes personal as the manner of death is chosen. Dying individuals who attached to machines and forces to live their life as a burden to their family suffer from loss of individual self, functional capacities and independence. Physician assisted suicide can be seen as a compassionate response to chronic suffering of a dying patient. Therefore, ending a life which filled with pain and anguish that provides the patient with a slow death can be considered as an act of compassion (Braddock III and Tonelli, 1998).
It is within the legal rights of a terminally ill patient to choose the type of treatment they wish to receive. The right to refuse treatment has to be part of that choice as it would ensure that their death is not prolonged. Assisted suicide can be seen as a means to hasten death for individual who are struggling to live out their remaining time on earth. The legalization of physician assisted death allows better transition of terminally ill patients from living through pain to end of life. Physician assisted suicide works as a transparent and an honesty way to ensure terminally ill patient is treated the way any other patient expecting treatment would be treated (Braddock III and Tonelli, 1998).
Physician assisted suicide is a personal choice and it should not a matter of concern for the state. But, several states in the United States of America oppose Physician assisted suicide, which prolongs life, but reduces the quality of life and increases the pain and suffering of a dying individual (Breslow, 2012). It should not be a matter of concern for the state, and physician assisted suicide should be a concern of individual liberty. Since, terminally ill individuals are not threatening the life of others, they should have the right to choose the way they expect to die, rather than being forced to live as the state desires.
Conclusion
Physician assisted suicide is a highly debated issue in the United States of America as only five states have passed regulations to legalize it. California will become the sixth state in June 2016, but a question is raised from this exploration, whether physician assisted suicide should be legalized. My personal opinion on the issue relates to the pros associated with the legalization of physician assisted suicides as it provides one last chance to enjoy autonomy, compassion, justice, liberty and honesty to the terminally ill patient. Also, it ensures that terminally ill patients are spared from the suffering of living out a life that has no meaning and lacks the necessary quality of life.
References
Barone., E. (2014, 3 November). See Which States Allow Assisted Suicide. Retrieved 3 May 2016 from, http://time.com/3551560/brittany-maynard-right-to-die-laws/
Braddock III., C.H. and Tonelli., M.R. (1998). Physician Aid-in-Dying. Retrieved 3 May 2016 from, https://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/pad.html
Breslow., J.M. (2012, 13 November). The Shadow Side of Assisted Suicide. Retrieved 3 May 2016 from, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/the-shadow-side-of-assisted-suicide/
CBS. (2016, 10 March). New California Right-To-Die Law To Take Effect In June. Retrieved 3 May 2016 from, http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2016/03/10/new-california-right-to-die-law-to-take-effect-in-june/
Newman., E. (1992). Part Five: Making The Final Choice: Should Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legalized?. Retrieved 3 May 2016 from, http://www.ennyman.com/das-5.html
